Test Items and Standards Related to Aerobic Functioning on the Brockport Physical Fitness Test

Transcription

1 The College at Brockport: State University of New York Digital Kinesiology, Sport Studies and Physical Education Faculty Publications Kinesiology, Sport Studies and Physical Education 2005 Test Items and Standards Related to Aerobic Functioning on the Brockport Physical Fitness Test Francis X. Short The College at Brockport, Joseph P. Winnick The College at Brockport, Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Kinesiology Commons Repository Citation Short, Francis X. and Winnick, Joseph P., "Test Items and Standards Related to Aerobic Functioning on the Brockport Physical Fitness Test" (2005). Kinesiology, Sport Studies and Physical Education Faculty Publications Citation/Publisher Attribution: Short, Francis X., & Winnick, Joseph P. (2005). Test Items and Standards Related to Aerobic Functioning on the Brockport Physical Fitness Test. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 22(4), This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Kinesiology, Sport Studies and Physical Education at Digital It has been accepted for inclusion in Kinesiology, Sport Studies and Physical Education Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Digital For more information, please contact

2 ADAPTED PHYSICAL ACTIVITY QUARTERLY, 2005, 22, Human Kinetics, inc. Test Items and Standards Reiated to Aerobic Functioning on the Brockport Physicai Fitness Test Francis X. Short and Joseph P. Winnick State University of New York, College at Brockport This article describes the procedures and rationale for the selection of test items and criterion-referenced standards associated with the aerobic functioning component of the Brockport Physical Fitness Test. Validity and reliability information is provided for the 1-mile run/walk, the PACER (16-m and 20-m), and the Target Aerobic Movement Test. The relevance of these test items and standards for youngsters with mental retardation and mild limitations infitness,visual impairments (blindness), cerebral palsy, and spinal cord injuries, and for those with congenital anomalies or amputations is highlighted. Information on the attainability of the selected standards also is provided. Possible topics for future research are suggested. For the Brockport Physical Fitness Test (BPFT; Winnick & Short, 1999), aerobic functioning refers to that component of physical fitness that permits one to sustain large muscle, dynamic, moderate to high intensity activity for prolonged periods of time. Aerobic functioning includes two subcomponents in the BPFT: aerobic capacity and aerobic behavior. Aerobic capacity refers to the highest rate of oxygen that can be consumed by exercising. In the BPFT, aerobic capacity is expressed by maximum oxygen uptake C^O^^. Standards for VO^^^ are expressed as ml/kg/min. Test items associated with aerobic capacity in the BPFT include the 1 -mile run/walk and the 16-m and 20-m Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run (PACER). Aerobic behavior refers to the ability to sustain physical activity of a specific intensity for a particular duration. The Target Aerobic Movement Test (TAMT) is the single measure of aerobic behavior in the BPFT. Consistent with the notion of personalization described in an earher article of this issue, test items and criterion-referenced (CR) standards were selected in accord with the two subcomponents of aerobic functioning and profile statements associated with each subcomponent. The profile statements reflect a desired level of health-related physical fitness for each subcomponent. In essence, the profile statements provide the goal for a health-related fitness program linked to a specific Francis X. Short is Dean, School of Arts and Performance, State University of New York, College at Brockport, Brockport, NY fshort@brockport.edu. Joseph P. Winnick is Distinguished Service Professor with the Department of Physical Education and Sport, State University of New York, College at Brockport, Brockport, NY jwinnick@brockport.edu 333

3 334 Short and Winnick Aerobic Functioning Aerobic Capacity Attain levels of aerobic capacity consistent witb positive pbysiological bealtb Aerobic Bebavior Attain levels of aerobic bebavior consistent witb positive functional bealtb l-mile runavalk PACER (20oi) \ PACER (20m) PACER (16m) Target Aerobic Movement Test Specific (Standards appropriate for youngsters witb visual impairments wbo run witb tactual guidance) General (Standards appropriate for youngsters wbose aerobic capacity is not restricted by physical impairment, running tecbnique, or limitations in fitness) Specific (Standards appropriate for youngsters wbose aerobic capacity is restricted by limitations in fitness due to mental retardation) General (Standard appropriate for youngsters witb and witbout disabilities) Minimal \ Preferred Minimal Figure 1 Relationships among subcomponents, test items, and standards for aerobic functioning. From The Brockport Physical Fitness Test manual, p. 26, by J. Winnick and F. Short Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Reprinted with permission. subcomponent of aerobic functioning. Figure 1 depicts the relatiotiships among the subcomponents, profile statements, selected test items, and selected standards. In the BPFT, test items are recommended (R) or optional (O) for defined groups and ages (readers are referred to the test manual for all test item selection guides). A recommended test item is considered to be appropriate and most acceptable for the measurement of physical fitness when other factors for selecting test items are met (e.g., facilities, equipment, time, etc.). Optional test items are alternate test items considered to be appropriate and acceptable for the measurement of components of physical fitness. Readers must refer to the test manual (Winnick & Short, 1999) for a complete description of test protocols. In the sections that follow, the validity and reliability related to tests of aerobic functioning in the BPFT will be discussed. The validity section includes information on test items, standards, and attainability and the reliability section primarily includes available test-retest data and some consistency of classification information. A discussion section is presented at the end of the manuscript. Validity Aerobic functioning and/or cardiovascular endurance has been considered an integral part of physical fitness for many years. Measures of aerobic functioning have been included in physical fitness tests, which purport to measure both performance- and health-related aspects offitness.distance runs, for example, have

4 Aerobic Functioning 335 been included in the Youth Fitness Test (AAHPERD, 1976), the Health Related Test (AAHPERD, 1980), and Project UNIQUE (Winnick & Short, 1985). In the BPFT, aerobic functioning is viewed as a health-related component of physical fitness. Although this article is not designed to be a definitive review of the benefits of aerobic fitness to health, it is important to stress that over the past few decades, research in support of a strong association of aerobic fitness and health status has accumulated (Blair et al., 1989; Erikssen, 1986; Peters, Cady, Bischoff, Bemsten, & Pike, 1983; Sobolski et al., 1987; Tell & Vellar, 1988; Wilhelmsen et al., 1981). Also, strong scientific support linking physical activity and health has resulted in organizational support for regular physical activity for health benefits. The American Heart Association (AHA, 1992) identified physical inactivity as a major risk factor in coronary heart disease. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the American College of Sports Medicine (Pate et al., 1995) recommended at least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity for every U.S. adult on most, preferably all, days of the week, for health-related benefits. The National Institutes of Health (NIH; Consensus Development Conference, 1995) and The Second International Consensus Symposium (Bouchard, Shephard, & Stephens, 1994) confirmed the importance of physical activity for health. The Surgeon General's report (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, USDHHS, 1996) emphasized that Americans can substantially improve their health and quality of life by including moderate amounts of physical activity in their daily routines. In May 2004, the World Health Organization (WHO) called for moderate levels of regular physical activity as an important component of a global strategy for healthy living (WHO, 2004). Tests of aerobic capacity have long been considered preferred measures of aerobic functioning because they refiect cardiorespiratory capacity, the ability to carry out prolonged strenuous exercise, and because they are associated with a reduced risk (in adults) of hypertension, coronary heart disease, obesity, diabetes, some forms of cancer, and other health problems (Cureton, 1994). For these reasons, measures of aerobic capacity are considered to be representative of "physiological health" in the BPFT. Physiological health is concerned with one's organic well-being. The FITNESSGRAM (Cooper Institute, 1992, 1999, 2004), the only health-related criterion-referenced physical fitness test currently endorsed by AAHPERD, currently uses three field tests of aerobic capacity in its battery: the 20-m PACER, the 1-mile run/walk (MRW), and 1-mile walk test. The CR standards associated with these tests are linked to maximum oxygen uptake (VO^^ values. VO^^^, therefore, serves to detine appropriate levels of aerobic capacity for health-related purposes and provides a basis for CR standards for specific test items. Critical VO^^^ values for the 20-m PACER and the MRW (Cooper Institute, 1992) adopted by theibpft (Winnick & Short, 1999) are presented in Table 1. These critical VO^^^ values range from ml/kg/min to 52 ml/kg/min for boys and from 35 ml/kg/min to 47 ml/kg/min for girls. In the FITNESSGRAM (Cooper Institute, 1992), these ranges define a "healthy fitness zone." In the BPFT, the lower values in the range represent "minimal" standards and the higher values "preferred" standards. As pointed out by Cureton (1994), the rationale for the upper and lower boundaries of the healthy fitness zones is based on data linking VO with disease in adults. The rationale for the use of VO, in the *- zmax 2max FITNESSGRAM as a health-related physical fitness test standard, the basis for

5 336 Short and Winnick Table 1 VO^^^^, 1-Mile Run/Walk, 20-m PACER, 16-m PACER, and Target Aerobic Movement Test General Standards Males Age (ml/kg7min) M P One Mile (min/sec) M P 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 9:30 9:00 8:30 8:30 9:00 8:30 8:00 7:30 7:00 7:00 7:00 7:00 20-m PACER (#laps) M P m PACER (#laps) M TAMP (min) M :30 12:00 12:00 11:30 11:00 Females 9:30 9:00 9:00 9:00 8: :30 10:00 10:00 8:00 8:00 8: M = Minimal; P= Preferred; 'Scored as pass/fail. Youngsters pass when they sustain moderate physical activity for 15 min Values for 16-m PACER and TAMT from The Brockport Physical Fitness Test Manual, p. 58, by J. Winnick & F. Short, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Reprinted with permission. Values for VOj_^^, 1 mile, and 20-m PACER adapted, with permission, from The Cooper Institute, FITNESSGRAM/ACTIVITYGRAM test administration manual, 3rd edition (Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics), 61,62. Note. The values provided by the Cooper Institute and presented here are from the 1992 FITNESS- GRAM; some values are different in the 2004 edition of HTNESSGRAM. the Standards identified, and the specific calculations used in order to determine values is explained in detail hy Cureton (1994). Most relevant for the purposes of this manuscript is a description and analysis ofthe adjustments of VO^j^^ values for individuals with disabihties. In this regard, two populations were considered for possible adjustments for VO^^^^, individuals who are blind and those who are mentally retarded and have mild limitations in fitness (i.e., those people requiring intermittent or limited support in learning or performing test items, or who require substantial modification to test items or alternate test items to measure one or more components of fitness). Based on a review

6 Aerobic Functioning 337 of literature, the Project Target staff and panel of experts concluded that there is no physiological reason why VO^^^ performance could not be developed for blind youngsters to the extent that it is expected in sighted populations. The decision to adopt the FITNESSGRAM values for maximum oxygen intake for adolescents with visual impairments and/or blindness was supported by several studies (Lee, Ward, & Shephard, 1985; Hopkins, Gaeta, & Hill, 1987; Sundberg, 1982) and by Cumming, Goulding and Baggley (1971), and Williams, Armstrong, and Faulker (1996), who indicated that levels of habitual activity play an important role in the development of maximum oxygen uptake. The decision to use the identical VO^^^ values for blind and sighted youngsters also was infiuenced by the opinion of Buell (1973), who indicated that students who are blind need a vigorous program of physical activity to give them superior levels of physical fitness because they must work harder to reach the same level of success as their sighted peers (see Table 2). Table 2 VO,^^, 1-Mile Run/Walk, 20-m PACER Specific Standards for Youngsters Who Are Blind^ Age Males Minimal General VO (ml/kg/min) Females 1-Mile Run/Walk (min, sec) 12:30 12:00 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:00 9:30 9:30 13:30 13:00 13:00 12:00 11:30 11:00 10:30 10:30 Aerobic Capacity 20-m PACER (#laps) 15 'These specific standards in the 1-mile run/walk and the 20-m PACER are based upon a bonus of 10 percentile points given to youngsters who are blind and require physical assistance in performing runs. The VO^^^ values associated with these specific standards are the same as the minimal general standards. From The Brockport Physical Fitness Test Manual, p. 59, by J. Winnick and F. Short, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Reprinted with permission

7 338 Short and Winnick The BPFT, on the other hand, does recommend adjustments to VO^^^ in the case of youngsters with mental retardation and mild limitations in physical fitness (see Table 3). In the BPFT, specific VO^^^ values recommended for individuals with MR are lowered 10% from those required ofthe general population. The 10% lowering ofthe VO^^^^ values was meant to adjust for the discrepancy that has been repeatedly observed between youngsters with and without MR on measures of aerobic capacity. In this regard, Shephard (1990) estimated that the scores of individuals with MR are 8 to 12% below those for nondisabled peers ofthe same age. Following a review of literature, Femhall, Tymeson, and Webster (1988) reported that the cardiovascular fitness levels of persons (including children, adolescents, and adults) with mental retardation ranges between 10 to 40% below those of their peers without disabilities. Table 3 VOj^^, and PACER Specific Standards for Youngsters with ivientai Retardation Age VO (ml/kg/min] r Males Females PACER (20-m) (# laps) PACER (16-m) (# laps) 2.3 ' Specific standards associated with a 10% downward adjustment of VO^^^^ from minimal general standards. ^ Laps for the 16-m are based upon estimates from 20-m PACER lap scores. 516-m laps = 1.25 (20-m laps) + 3.8, S.E. = m laps =.71 (16-m laps) -.87, S.E. = m lap values are approximately 63% of 16-m lap scores. From The Brockport Physical Fitness Test Manual, p. 60, by J. Winnick and F. Short, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Reprinted with permission

8 Aerobic Functioning 339 Shephard (1990) reported that the maximum oxygen intake of individuals with mental retardation is generally lower than in the population of nondisabled peers, although values reported have ranged quite widely among various studies. In view of the wide variation in studies reporting the maximum oxygen intake values of youngsters with mental retardation, the panel of experts associated with Project Target and authors of the BPFT adopted the 10% downward adjustment in values to serve as a specific standard. This standard was selected for several reasons. First, it is viewed as a realistic but conservative adjustment for scientifically unaccounted for discrepancies between youngsters with and without mental retardation relative to aerobic capacity. Second, it serves as a realistic and attainable standard, which reasonably approaches standards associated with the general population. Third, the standard advances the individual from levels that are considered by authorities as reflective of poor condition and a sedentary lifestyle. A lower standard (e.g., a 40% adjustment), for instance, could possibly be misinterpreted as representing a positive level of health-related aerobic fitness. Although tests of aerobic capacity may be the preferred measures of aerobic functioning because of their association with "physiological health," tests of aerobic behavior also may play a role in the assessment of aerobic functioning. Tests of aerobic behavior measure the ability to sustain aerobic activity. Since such an ability has relevance for the execution of daily activities (including education and recreation), it is considered to be an indication of one's "functional health." In the BPFT, individuals demonstrating the ability to sustain moderate physical activity for 15 min meet the minimal general standard for health-related aerobic behavior. An exercise heart rate of at least 70% of maximum predicted heart rate adjusted for disability or mode of exercise represents moderate exercise. Not only does this kind of activity have implications for functional health, but it is also believed to reflect behavior, that when performed regularly, is consistent with existing general recommendations for health enhancement or maintenance (American College of Sports Medicine, 1990, 1995; USDHHS, 1996) and, depending on other factors, may be sufficiently intense to stimulate an aerobic training effect (McArdle, Katch, & Katch, 2001). Current recommendations for the development of cardiorespiratory endurance call for a minimum of 20 min of aerobic activity with the acknowledgement that multiple shorter bouts of activity (i.e., 10 min) provide the exercise equivalent at a single longer bout (American College of Sports Medicine, 2005). So, the TAMT provides an indication of a youngster's ability to exercise at a moderate intensity and a sufficient duration and that when performed multiple times per day, 3-5 days per week, meets current recommendations for aerobic behavior. The BPFT tests of aerobic functioning are discussed on the following pages of this article. The three measures of aerobic capacity, the 1-mile run/walk and two versions of the PACER, are covered first, followed by the single measure of aerobic behavior, the TAMT. 1-Mile Run/Walk The 1-mile run/walk is included in the Brockport Physical Fitness Test to estimate ^^2max- ^" discussing the validity ofthe MRW to estimate VO^^^, Cureton (1994) referred to both construct and concurrent validity. In regard to the test items for children and adolescents without disabilities, Cureton established a rationale for

9 340 Short and Winnick using the MRW by pointing out the important contribution of VO^^^ compared to other physiological and behavioral factors in run performance. In regard to concurrent validity, Cureton (1994) summarized his and other studies and reported Pearson r's ranging from.60 to.85 between distance run time and VO^^^^. Based on these data, Cureton (1994) concluded that the 1-mile run/walk has moderate concurrent validity as a measure of VO^^^^. In the BPFT, the MRW is a recommended test item for youngsters in the general population and those with arm only involvement and classified as having a congenital anomaly or amputation (CA/A). It is an optional test item for individuals who have a visual impairment (VI). Standards Minimal and preferred general standards for the one-mile run/wauc are recommended for the general population, youngsters with CA/A, and youngsters who exhibit visual impairments but who are not blind. General standards for the MRW are presented in Table 1. Minimal general standards are believed to be consistent with positive health and functional capacity for daily living in adult men and women, and preferred standards are based on a level of VO^^jj^, which is thought to he good and associated with lower disease risk and mortality in adults (Cureton, 1994). Mile run/walk CR standards used in the FITNESSGRAM and the Brockport Physical Fitness Test are described by Cureton and Warren (1990) and Cureton (1994). Inasmuch as the process of linking MRW times to critical values of VO^^^^ is somewhat involved, it will not be reiterated here, but the performance standards "were estimated using data on the energy cost of running at different speeds and by assuming that a certain percentage of the aerobic capacity was utilized during running" (Cureton & Warren, 1990, p. 11). Cureton (1994) indicated that the upper boundary (or "preferred") standards correspond to the 60-70th percentile of the National Children and Youth Fitness Study (NCYFS; Ross, Dotson, Gilbert, & Katz, 1985) norms for boys and the 80-99th percentile for girls. Cureton and Warren (1990) evaluated the validity of the 1987 FITNESSGRAM criterion-referenced standards using data on 578 children without disabilities, ages They reported that the standards that were established were reasonably valid in classifying VO^^^. The percentage of children classified correctly averaged 85% for the original FITNESSGRAM standards. Although youngsters who are blind are held to the same VO^^^ standards as those in the general population, adjustments in MRW test scores, which represent the VOj^^ standards, have been adjusted and specific standards created for youngsters with these visual impairments (see Table 2). Buell (1983) recommended that a "bonus" of 10 percentile points be given to a blind performer in long distance runs for equitable comparisons of performance with sighted peers. He felt that such an adjustment is warranted hecause the runners are slowed down by either running side by side, touching elbows from time to time, or holding the elbow of a sighted person. Using the 10 percentile adjustment as the basis, several computational steps were followed in adjusting the MRW standards for runners who are blind from minimal general standards. Leeway was given for "rounding" or "smoothing" of the standards. It can be noted that specific standards for blind males ages are 60 sec below minimal general standards. The specific standards for blind females between the ages of is 30 sec slower than that of the minimal general standards for females. Although the one-mile run/wauc is only identified as an optional test item for youngsters with visual impairments, ages 15-17, the specific standards

10 Aerobic Functioning 341 for youngsters who are blind extend from ages 10 to 17 in Table 2. These are provided so that practitioners can use these data as guidelines in training programs designed to improve the one-mile run/walk performance of individuals who are blind. Although the provision of specific standards is warranted, the Brockport Physical Fitness Test encourages individuals who are blind to pursue the minimal standards for the general population. Also, it must be emphasized that standards for youngsters with visual impairments who are not blind (i.e., partially sighted) are identical to those used in the general population. Attainability Since the one-mile run/wauc has not traditionally been used as an item in tests of physical fitness involving blind youngsters, data related to the performance of typical youngsters who are blind were not found. However, information related to the attainability of specific standards for males and females from the general population can be drawn from an analysis of data associated with the NCYFS. In reviewing these data, it may be noted that specific standards for males who are blind are associated with the 10th percentile performance of sighted males, ages 15 to 17. The specific standards for females who are blind approximate performance of sighted females at the 60th percentile at age 15, the 50th percentile at age 16, and the 50th percentile at age 17. The minimal general standards for males are associated with performance at the 20th percentile relative to the NCYFS. The minimal general standards for females correspond to approximately the 60th percentile of sighted youngsters on the NCYFS for ages Although the analysis was conducted on a data set for youngsters without disabilities, it suggests that blind girls might find the CR standards more challenging than might blind boys, but to the extent that blind youngsters have the potential to achieve the critical VO^^^ values recommended for sighted youngsters, and providing the 10 percentile "bonus" is appropriate, the standards appear to be within reach for both genders. Although satisfactory data related to the MRW performance of youngsters with visual impairments is unavailable, the aerobic power of students who are blind has been studied and provides insight on the ability to perform. For example. Lee and colleagues (1985) found that the average VO^^^ score after training of males who are blind was 51.7 ml/kg/min. For females, the average value was 38.0 ml/kg/min. (The 10 males and 9 females were between 11 and 18 years of age.) These values exceed the recommended specific and minimal general ^O^^^ values for males and females between the ages of on the BPFT. It is expected that youngsters with these aerobic abilities are capable of reaching these standards on the 1-mile run/walk on the BPFT. PACER The 16-m and 20-m PACER tests are also included as items in the BPFT to estimate aerobic capacity (VOj_^^). In reviewing the validity of the 20-m PACER, Cureton (1994) asserted that the PACER has high content validity in that it closely simulates a graded speed incremented treadmill test used in the laboratory to directly measure VO^^^^. Cureton (1994) indicated that the concurrent validity of the PACER is moderate and approximately the same as distance runs for estimating ^^2max' ^^ reviewed literature regarding the concurrent validity of the PACER test in children and adolescents and reported validity coefficients ranging from

11 3 Short and Winnick.51 to.90 (Cureton, 1994). Although currently available information suggests acceptable levels of validity, Cureton (1994) felt that more studies investigating the relative value of the PACER and other distance runs for predicting VO^^^^^ and for classifying VO^^^^^^ using criterion-referenced standards are needed. Results of research on 20-m PACER performance of youngsters with mental retardation also has been encouraging. In separate studies (Femhall et al., 1998; Femhall, Millar, Pitteti, Hensen, & Vukovich, 2000), Femhall and colleagues reported correlations of.88 and.86 between 20-m PACER scores and measured ^^2 peak ^'^ noted that these values are actually higher than what is typically obtained for youngsters without disabilities. After testing participants with mild mental retardation, aged 8-21, on the PACER and a treadmill test. Beets, Pitetti, and Femhall (2005) concluded that the PACER appears to be an acceptablefieldmeasure of cardiovascular fitness of youth with mental retardation. When the 20-m PACER was administered to youngsters with MR during Project Target, however, it was observed that (a) younger children (aged 10-12) had difficulty reaching the 20-m distance even during the first two or three laps of the test; (b) the time spent running during the total test was low; and (c) too large a number of participants failed to complete one lap, possibly because of shorter stature and overall inefficiency of running. For these reasons, the investigators were prompted to shorten the distance of the run. In a study conducted in connection with Project Target in the spring of 1995 (Winnick & Short, 1998), data collected using 21 participants with MR demonstrated that the laps and distance run at a known intensity when changing from the 20-m PACER to the 16-m PACER moved from 6.8 laps (approx. 1 min) or 135 m, to 13 laps (approx. 2 min), or 207 m. Sixteen of 21 participants increased total distance run in the study as a result of shortening laps. Also, three more participants ran at least 1 min when the shorter distance was used. In a second study using 34 participants aged with mental retardation in the summer of 1995, data were collected on the 16-m PACER, the 20-m PACER, the 600-yard run/walk, and peak oxygen consumption (VO^ ^; Femhall et al., 1998). The average number of laps increased from 15.5 (approx. 136 sec) to 23.1 (approx. 233 sec), and the average distance covered increased from 310 m to 370 m when comparing performance on the 20-m and 16-m PACER. Again, time engaged in running and distance of mn at a known intensity increased with an increase in laps performed. In a third study conducted in the spring of 1997 (Winnick & Short, 1998), 31 participants with mental retardation and mild limitations in physical fitness were tested on both the 20-m and 16-m PACER. Again, average number of laps completed increased from 10.3 (approx. 86 sec.) to 21.4 (approx. 180 sec), and the average distance covered increased from 206 m to 3 m. In the 20-m test, 7 of 31 participants failed to mn for at least 1 min, whereas only 2 of 31 participants were unable to mn the test for at least 1 min when laps were shortened to 16 m. Although shortening the distance of the 20-m PACER for youngsters with MR has advantages in terms of time and distance of mnning, a disadvantage is that more research is needed to clearly support the 16-m PACER mn as a test of aerobic capacity. The study conducted in the summer of 1995 provides some information in this regard (see Table 4; Femhall et al., 1998). In that study, a correlation coefficient ofr-.ll(p<.01) was found between VO^ ^ and the 16-m PACER.

12 Aerobic Functioning 343 Table 4 Relationships Among PACER, 600 yd Run/Waik, and V in Participants With ivientai Retardation and ivilid Limitations in Physicai Fitness 600 yd VO;Pe,K 20-m PACER 16-m PACER run/walk 20-m PACER.74** 1.00**.94** -.62** 16-m PACER.77**.94** LOO** -.64** 600 yd run/walk -.80** -.62** -.64** 1.00** *p<0.05 This was comparable to the r =.74 (p <.01) found between the 20-m PACER and VOjp^^. Also a very strong relationship (r =.94, p <.01) was found between the 16-m and 20-m PACER, and some support for the 16-m PACER as a test of long distance running was given by the r = -.62 (p<.01) between the 600 yd. run/walk and the 16-m PACER. Relatedly, McClain (2004) investigated a 15-m PACER as an alternative to the 20-m PACER with 171 fifth and eighth graders without disability. He found a correlation of.76 between the VOj_^ estimates provided by the two tests and concluded that both tests provide similar information and that the shorter test is a useful alternative to the 20-m PACER. While these statistics are encouraging, there is a clear need to continue study of the 16-m PACER as a test of aerobic capacity. The 20-m PACER is a recommended or optional (dependent upon age) test item for youngsters in the general population; a recommended item for youngsters with mental retardation and mild limitations in physical fitness, ages 13-17; a recommended test item for youngsters with visual impairments, ages 10-17; and for youngsters, ages 10-17, with arm only involvement classified as a congenital anomaly or amputation. The 16-m PACER is only recommended for youngsters with MR, ages Standards Minimal and preferred general standards for the 20-m PACER are recommended for the general population, youngsters with visual impairments but who are not blind (i.e., partially sighted), and for youngsters with arm only involvement classified as a CA/A. These are the same standards used in the FITNBSSGRAM (1992). According to Cureton (1994), both the upper and lower boundaries of the healthy fitness zone for the 20-m PACER in the FITNESSGRAM were determined from a regression equation provided by Leger, Mercier, Gadoury, and Lambert (1988): 'VOzmax = (maximal PACER running speed) (age) (maximal PACER running speed) (age) This equation had a multiple R of.71 with VOj_^^ and a standard error of estimate of 5.9 ml/kg/min. The Leger et al. (1988) equation was rearranged to predict maximal PACER running speed from age and the critical VO^^^ value. Predicted speed was then converted to laps for use as the CR standard (Cureton, 1994).

13 344 Short and Winnick Although minimal and preferred general standards have been adopted for use in the BPFT for certain groups of youngsters on the 20-m PACER, specific standards are also recommended for youngsters who are blind or who have mental retardation and mild limitations in physical fitness. The specific standards developed for youngsters who are blind were based upon the "bonus" of ten percentile points recommended by Buell (1983) mentioned earlier. Again, the adjustment is believed to be warranted in selecting a minimal specific standard because of inefficiency in running with a partner or guide wire. Several computational steps were used in adjusting the minimal general standards to specific standards for youngsters who are blind. The first step was to determine an adjustment percentage for each age and gender. This was based on a percentage comparison between minimal general and specific standards for youngsters who are blind on the one-mile run/walk. Once percentage difference was determined for each age and gender, an average adjustment factor was obtained. For males, specific standards ranged from 89% to 92% of minimal general standards, ages For females, the differences in standards ranged from 92% to 93%, ages and 95% to 96%, ages Thus, the specific standards were based on a 10% adjustment for males, ages and for females, ages A 5% adjustment was used for females, ages The 5 to 10% adjustment based on running performance in the 1-mile run/walk was then applied to lap performance in the 20-m PACER (see Table 2). The specific CR standards for youngsters with mental retardation and mild limitations in physical fitness on the 20-m PACER were based on the 10% downward adjustment in VO^^^ discussed earlier in the article (see Table 3). Using the Leger et al. (1988) equation, Cureton calculated laps to serve as the specific CR standards from these adjusted VO^^^ values (K.J. Cureton, personal communication, October 15,1996). Readers should note that the specific standards for 10-and 11-year-old girls were arbitrarily set at one lap when the equation predicted zero laps using the adjusted VO^^^^ values. Consequently, the one-lap standard for these two age groups actually represents a slightly higher critical VO^^^^ value than is shown in Table 3. Although the 16-m PACER is only recommended for youngsters with MR aged 10-12, both minimal general and specific standards are provided throughout the age range. Minimal general standards are provided in order to place the specific standards in some context; youngsters with MR should be encouraged to strive to achieve the same standards recommended for nondisabled youngsters when appropriate. Standards provided for year-old youngsters may be used at the discretion of the tester in cases where the 20-m PACER may be inappropriate. The specific standards for the 16-m PACER are based upon estimates from 20-m lap scores attained in the study conducted in the summer of 1995 as part of Project Target (Femhall et al., 1998). In that study, 34 youngsters with MR (22 males and 12 females) between the ages of were tested on both the 16-m and 20-m PACER tests with a 2-5 day separation between tests. Results indicated that 20-m lap values were approximately 63% of 16-m lap scores. A regression analysis was used to develop a formula to predict 16-m lap values from the 20-m standards. Since the specific 20-m PACER CR standards were arbitrarily established for 10-and 11-year-old girls, the predicted 16-m PACER CR standards, by necessity, have a similar limitation.

14 Aerobic Functioning 345 A ttainability Because of the lack of success by researchers in developing a valid and reliable test of aerobic capacity for youngsters with MR in the past, considerable attention was given to this task as a part of Project Target (Winnick & Short, 1998). Between 1994 and 1995,114 youngsters with MR, ages 10-17, were tested on the 20-m PACER in different locations throughout the country. Using the minimal general standard associated with the FITNESSGRAM (Cooper Institute, 1992), it was found that only nine of 114 (8%) males and females met the standard. Because of this finding and difficulties with the 20-m PACER identified earlier in this manuscript, it was decided by the Project Target staff to experiment with reducing the length of the test to 16 m and use the 16-m PACER specific standards presented in Table 3 as the criterion for passing. Between 1996 and 1997, 84 youngsters with MR (ages 10-17) were tested and 29 (34%) passed the test using these standards. As a matter of interest, the 20-m specific standards were apphed to two samples including 57 participants. Using the 20-m PACER specific standards, a passing rate of 30% was found (17 of 57 participants met or surpassed the standard). In order to compare passing rates resulting from the 16-m and 20-m specific standards, the standards were applied to one sample (w = 30) in which both the 16-m and 20-m runs were administered to the same participants. Using the 16-m specific standards, a passing rate of 37% (11 of 30) was found, and using the 20-m specific standards, a passing rate of 33 % (10 of 30) was found (Winnick & Short, 1998). Although the results suggest similar passing rates, more research with greater subject numbers is needed to draw more definite conclusions in this regard. The 20-m PACER is also a recommended test item for youngsters with visual impairments. In addition, adjusted specific standards may be used in the BPFT for youngsters who are bhnd. Two studies were conducted in regard to this population as a part of Project Target (Winnick & Short, 1998). The first study included 39 youngsters who were blind, ages 10-14, attending camps in Michigan. When the general standards were applied as a criterion for passing the 20-m PACER, 11 of 39 (28%) passed the test item. When the specific standards were applied, 13 of 39 (33%) of the sample passed the test item. Results suggested that "fit" participants will pass either criterion and "unfit" youngsters will fail either criterion. The second study was conducted in New York City and included 50 youngsters with visual impairments, ages A total of 28 of these youngsters were blind. When the 20-m PACER was administered to the total sample, 5 of 31 (16%) males and 10 of 19 (53%) females passed the test using the minimal general standards for the 20-m PACER. When the same general standards were applied to just the blind youngsters, 7 of 28 (25%) passed the test item. When the specific standard for youngsters who are blind were applied to the sample of blind youngsters, the same 25% passing rate was found. In regard to this sample, females with visual impairments as a group and females who were blind as a group exceeded a 50% passing rate. Conversely, the passing rate for males ranged from 11% for males who were blind to 26% for males who were designated as youngsters with visual impairments (i.e., included youngsters who were partially sighted). The identical passing rate (25%) was found whether a minimal general or specific standard was applied in the case of youngsters who are blind. However, when the total sample of visually impaired participants was considered, the passing rate moved from 30% to 38% when the minimal general standard was supplanted by the specific standard.

15 346 Short and Winnick Target Aerobic Movement Test While tests of aerobic capacity are the preferred measures for aerobic functioning, in some cases it is not yet practical to estimate aerobic capacity in a field setting. This generally is true for individuals with physical disabilities and especially for those with cerebral palsy. The extent and nature of the disability, the type and condition of the wheelchair or other assistive device that may be used, and the type of surface on which the test is conducted all contribute to the complexity of estimating aerobic capacity for youngsters with physical disabilities. Because of the difficulty in measuring aerobic capacity, the BPFT offers aerobic behavior as a surrogate for the assessment of aerobic functioning and the Target Aerobic Movement Test as a measure of aerobic behavior. The TAMT is a test that is designed to directly measure a youngster's ability to engage in physical activity at an intensity and duration consistent with recommendations for good aerobic behavior. Youngsters who pass the test have demonstrated the ability to sustain at least moderate physical activity. Specifically, the test requires participants to exercise for 15 minutes within a target heart rate zone with a lower limit set at approximately 70% of one's predicted maximum heart rate. (Testers also have the option of raising the threshold of the target heart rate zone to 75% or 80% of predicted maximum heart rate if more intense levels of activity are desired. These more intense criteria constitute levels II and III of the TAMT.) Adjustments to the target heart rate zone are made for youngsters with quadriplegia and for those youngsters who engage in arms-only forms of physical activity (including those with paraplegia). These adjustments are necessary to account for the effects of quadriplegia and arms-only activity on maximal heart rate (Shephard, 1990). Although recommendations in the literature for the duration of aerobic activity may go as high as 60 min (American College of Sports Medicine, 2005), the TAMT requires 15 min in order to make the test practical for use in field situations and school settings. While the TAMT does not measure the frequency of aerobic behavior (unless testers choose to administer on a regular basis), the 15-min duration is supported in part by research "showing that cardiorespiratory fitness gains are similar when physical activity occurs in several short sessions (e.g., 10 min) as when the same total amount and intensity of activity occurs in longer sessions (e.g., 30 min)" (USDHHS, 1996, p. 5). The TAMT is a recommended test item for youngsters with MR, CP, SCI, and some forms of CA/A. Standards General criterion-referenced standards in connection with the TAMT are recommended for all populations (no specific standards are provided). The standard for the TAMT is for a youngster to exercise for 15 min within a selected target heart rate zone (THRZ). With exceptions associated with selected physical disabilities, the THRZ is 70 (moderate level of physical activity) to 85% of maximum predicted heart rate. Participants can engage in virtually any physical activity as long as the activity is of sufficient intensity to reach a minimum target heart rate (THR) and to sustain heart rate in the target heart rate zone appropriate for the individual. Attainability The TAMT was administered to 75 males and females with disabilities in connection with Project Target (Winnick & Short, 1998). The first sample included 28 males and females with spina bifida myelomeningocele, ages 10-18,

16 Aerobic Functioning 347 who attended a residential summer camp in In this study, all the participants propelled wheelchairs while performing the TAMT. They performed the TAMT in groups of six or less a minimum of two times with a 1 -day rest between tests. A total of 27 out of 28 eligible participants (96%) passed test 1, and 25 out of 27 eligible participants (93%) passed test 2 (i.e., met the criterion for successful completion of the TAMT; Rimmer, Connor-Kuntz, Winnick, & Short, 1997). The TAMT was administered in a second study including 25 participants in connection with the New York State Games for the Physically Challenged in Brockport, New York in 1995 (Winnick & Short, 1998). The subject sample included 11 females ranging in age from 10 to 18 with an average age of 13.4 years and 14 male participants in the 10 to 17 age range with a mean age of 12.7 years. Five of the participants had a spinal cord injury (SCI); 11 had cerebral palsy (CP); eight were classified as Les Autres (LA); and one had a congenital anomaly or amputation (CA/A). A total of 20 of the 25 participants attempted the TAMT. Of the 20 participants who took the test, 15 passed. Tlie 15 successful participants included two with SCI, seven with CP (classes C4 through C8), and six with LA conditions. Nine of the 15 participants used arm ergometry as their activity of choice while the other six ran. Of the five participants who could not meet the test criteria, four were unable to achieve the target heart rate zone. Two of the four unsuccessful participants were youngsters with class 1 CP, a third was classified as C7, and a fourth was classified as T4 SCI. The fifth unsuccessful subject complained of dizziness a minute or two into the test and the test was terminated at that time for that individual. In a third study conducted at the School of the Holy Childhood in Rochester, New York, during the Spring 1996, 27 participants with mental retardation and mild limitations in physical fitness were administered the TAMT (Winnick & Short, 1998). The sample included 14 females and 13 male participants between the ages of 10 and 17. The activities performed during the test included a fast walk, playing tag, and running. A total of 24 of the 27 participants (89%) passed the test item. In summary, 75 participants were administered the TAMT in the three studies (Winnick & Short, 1998). Atotal of 66 of 75 (88%) passed, thereby demonstrating the ability to sustain moderate physical activity and providing evidence that the standards are attainable by youngsters with disabilities. 1-Mile Run/Walk Reliability Based on a review of literature, Safrit and Wood (1995) concluded that performance on long distance runs is highly reliable. A review of literature on reliability indicates that for children and adolescents nine years of age (3rd grade) and older, the reliability is higher than for younger children (see Table 5). Research reported by Colgan (1978), Vodola (1978), Doolittle and Bigbee (1968), Doolittle, Dominic, and Doolittle (1969), Buono, Roby, Micale, Sallis, and Shepard (1991), and Rikli, Petray, and Baumgartner (1992) indicate that the reliability of long distance runs is high (.80 to.98). Rikli et al. (1992)

17 348 Short and Winnick B B B,. o I u. o 2 I (0 I O) I S^ II C 00 u O\ c; ON ON S II' «II g II II 3 CO VO I 12 --' w u u ^ OO T6-20- TO- TO- 60 a oo w u < r~ H H 3 D 1 00 ges T6- TOges ges TO- TOees Q c r^ D Q 00 e 3 Grade c 3 Q 00 c 2 Si & TOt raders SO ON (0 I0) 00 CM VO fn O Ov 8 O T3.S oo (0 < is I I a I T3 BOZ 00 Ov O\.2 oc in O 3 o r- O\ 0? r- eg 00 n D.(0 odol 1Q

18 Aerobic Functioning 349.a B m B u B I g II II I 60? O o 3 1 O s 1 O s S2 T3 ca O o I en ^ B B o T3 U 3 I in.(0 a^ 8 8 QQ C3 C/5 o ft I

19 350 Short and Winnick computed P values (proportion of agreement) on the 1-mile run/walk using 1987 FITNESSGRAM CR standards and reported values of.70 or greater for males and females, ages seven to nine. These criterion-referenced reliability values support the investigators' conclusion that distance runs can be used as a reliable instrument for youngsters at these age levels. Reliability may be enhanced by having children prepared to pace themselves appropriately during the run and for test administrators to pay particular attention to motivating youngsters to perform to their utmost ability. PACER The PACER appears to be a highly reliable test item (see Table 5). A test-retest correlation of r =.89 was reported by Leger et al. (1988) using 188 participants without disability between the ages of 8-19 on the 20-m shuttle run. More recently, Pitetti, Femhall, and Figoni (2002) tested 51 youngsters without disability between the ages of 8-15 on the 20-m PACER and reported the same test-retest correlation of.89. In a study conducted in the summer of 1995 as a part of Project Target, 20 males and females with MR were tested and retested on the 16-m PACER (Winnick & Short, 1998). A test-retest alpha (a) coefficient of.98 was attained on the sample of youngsters, ages In 1996, another study was conducted as a part of Project Target in which test-retest data were collected on 34 males and females with mild MR on both the 16-m and 20-m PACER (Winnick & Short, 1998). A test-retest a =.96 was reported for the 16-m PACER and a =.97 was reported using the 20-m PACER. Participant ages ranged from 10 to 18. Finally, in the spring of 1997, another study including 35 males and females with mild MR, ages was conducted (Winnick & Short, 1998). In that study, youngsters were tested and retested on the 16-m PACER. An a =.98 was found between the two tests administered one-week apart. A proportion of agreement (P) was also computed in the study as an estimation of criterion-referenced reliability. Youngsters were studied to determine consistency in reaching criterion-referenced specific standards for their age and gender on the Brockport Physical Fitness Test. A P =.93 indicating high reliability was obtained. TAMT The Target Aerobic Movement Test is a relatively new item designed in association with Project Target and is recommended for use with the BPFT. As a part of Project Target, one study was conducted to determine the reliability of the TAMT for a group of youngsters with spina bifida (Rimmer et al., 1997). A sample including 32 children (11 participants with thoracic lesions, 21 participants with lumbar lesions) volunteered for the study. The same participants performed the TAMT on two different days. All participated by propelling a wheelchair. Out of 24 participants who performed two trials of the test, 22 passed both trials (proportion of agreement =.92). All 24 participants passed one of the two tests. A r-test indicated that there was no significant difference in the proportion of participants who passed test 1 or test 2 (p > 0.05).

20 Aerobic Functioning 351 Discussion In developing a health-related criterion-referenced test of physical fitness for youngsters with disabilities, it was particularly important to address three major needs in regard to the measurement and assessment of aerobic functioning. First, it was considered important to develop a test and standards for the measurement of aerobic functioning for youngsters with mental retardation and mild limitations in physical fitness that reflects at least the ability to sustain moderate physical activity and could be efficiently used in schools and/or other field settings. Second, there was a need for some measure and standards of health-related aerobic functioning for those youngsters restricted in the ability to ambulate. This primarily included individuals with physical disabilities. Third, there was a need to adopt a test and standards of health-related aerobic functioning for youngsters who are blind. The authors feel that much progress was made in addressing these needs in the BPFT and preceding paragraphs reflect the ways in which these needs were met. In regard to the measurement of aerobic capacity for youngsters with MR, the 16-m and 20-m PACER tests were finally selected as the suggested test items and specific standards were developed for each. Results of research associated with Project Target clearly demonstrated that those test items can be learned and, indeed, are reliable when used with this population. The specific lap values for both the 16-m and 20-m PACER are based upon a 10% VO^^^^ downward adjustment. The adjustment in lap values for the 20-m PACER was applied to data in which 20-m PACER performance was matched with VO^^^. Corresponding lap values for the 16-m PACER were estimated from a regression equation predicting them from 20-m values. Additional research is needed regarding concurrent validity in which the relationship of 16-m PACER performance and VOj_^^ is established and used as the basis for specific standards. Data collected as a part of Project Target also suggest a disproportionately higher passing rate for females than for males on the PACER. It is recommended that gender be addressed to a greater extent in future research relating to VO^^^ and the 16-m and 20-m PACER standards. The 20-m PACER for ages and the one-mile run/walk for ages are recommended test items for the measurement of aerobic capacity on the BPFT for youngsters with visual impairments. The same standards recommended for the general population are recommended for youngsters who are partially sighted. Also, general VOj^^^ values are recommended for use with all youngsters with visual impairment; however, for blind youngsters who require assistance, CR standards associated with the one-mile run/walk and PACER are based upon a bonus of 10 percentile points. With few exceptions, these test items have not traditionally been a part of physical fitness tests used with this population. Field-testing as a part of Project Target (Winnick & Short, 1998) clearly demonstrates acceptability of the PACER as a test item. Less data were collected relative to the one-mile run/walk, but the data that were collected supported use of the test item. The decision to use the one-mile run/walk was strongly advocated by the Project Target panel of experts. The rationale essentially reflected the position that youngsters with visual impairments can and should reach the same critical VO^^^^ values as their sighted counterparts, but the CR standards associated with the test items need to be adjusted for youngsters who are blind to account for the higher energy demands of running with assistance.

21 352 Short and Winnick It appears that the BPFT has effectively addressed the measurement and evaluation of aerobic functioning of individuals with ambulation problems. Conceptualizing aerobic functioning as having both physiological and functional components was important in this regard and provided an option when the measurement of aerobic capacity, as an index of physiological health, was not practical. It is practical, however, to measure aerobic behavior as an index of functional health in youngsters with mobility problems. This functional orientation emphasizes the ability to sustain physical activity of a specific intensity for a particular duration. The term aerobic behavior was selected to reflect levels of intensity and duration of activity that when performed regularly, result in improved aerobic functioning. Following considerable research, the TAMT was adopted as the measure of aerobic behavior. Logic is the basis for its validity (content validity). Research conducted as a part of Project Target has clearly substantiated attainability and has provided data supporting the reliability of the test item. One advantage of the TAMT is the acceptability of using a variety of exercise modes in elevating heart rate. This is critical in instances in which movement abilities are diverse. In regard to future research, it is recommended that the TAMT be further examined for use with youngsters who are more severely impaired, to study the worthiness of higher levels of the test, and the possible use of the test in estimating aerobic capacity. Overall, the authors feel that the TAMT is valid, reliable, and otherwise an appropriate test of aerobic behavior for use in field situations with individuals with a variety of movement impairments. Although some advancement has been made in field testing aerobic functioning in youngsters with disabilities, it is readily apparent that continued research on several related topics is warranted and necessary. The following list summarizes suggested areas of research and in some instances recommendations regarding priority needs. A high priority need is to provide additional concurrent validity data regarding the use of the 16-m PACER as a test of maximum oxygen uptake for all youngsters but particularly for youngsters with mental retardation, ages There is a need to further study reliability of the 16-m PACER test item. The feasibility, reliability, and validity of the TAMT (including the higher THRZ versions) should be investigated using participants from the general population as well as participants with disabilities. The validity of higher levels of the TAMT as a predictor of aerobic capacity should be investigated. The efficiency of youngsters who are blind running with partners in the onemile run/walk needs investigation. Investigate the running efficiency of youngsters with mental retardation on the 16-m and 20-m PACER. The validity and reliability of the TAMT using various modes of activity with diverse populations should be investigated. Determine heart rate zones to represent moderate physical activity intensity for youngsters with quadriplegia on the TAMT.

22 Aerobic Functioning 353 There is a need to continue investigating test reliability of items on the BPFT with a variety of youngsters with disabilities (particularly on the reliability of pass/fail outcomes based on the CR standards). Examine the role of gender in developing CR standards related to aerobic capacity. Investigate the utility of the FITNESSGRAM walk test for youngsters with disabilities. Investigate the need for changes in standards for aerobic capacity for youngsters with disabilities as research advances occur for youngsters without disabilities. In closing, the authors of the BPFT feel that the test has made significant advances in the measurement of health-related assessment of aerobic functioning of youngsters with disabilities. Particularly noteworthy is its willingness to conceptualize and measure aerobic behavior as an estimate of health-related fitness. This orientation from the focus of measurement of aerobic capacity to the measurement of aerobic behavior appears appropriate for the populations for which it is recommended in field situations. References American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM). (1990). The recommended quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness in healthy adults. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 22, A. American College of Sports Medicine. (1995). ACSM's guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. (5th ed.). Media, PA: Williams & Wilkins. American College of Sports Medicine. (2005). ACSM's guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Williams. American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance. (1976). Youth Fitness Test manual. Washington, DC: Author. American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance. (1980). Health Related Physical Fitness Test manual. Washington, DC: Author. American Heart Association (AHA). (1992). Medical/scientific statement on exercise: Benefits and recommendations for physical activity for all Americans. Circulation, 85, Beets, M., Pitetti, K., & Femhall, B. (2005). Peak heart rates in youth with mental retardation: PACER vs. treadmill. Pediatric Exercise Science, 17, Blair, S.N., Kohl, H.W., IH, Paffenbarger, R.S., Jr., Clark, D.G., Cooper, K.H., & Gibbons, L.W. (1989). Physical fitness and all-cause mortality: A prospective study of healthy men and women. Journal of the American Medical Association, 262, Bouchard, C, Shephard, R.J., & Stephens, T., (Eds.). (1994). Physical activity, fitness, and health: International proceedings and consensus statement. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Buell, C.E. (1973). Physical education and recreation for the visually handicapped. Washington, DC: American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation. Buell, C.E. (1983). Physical education for blind children. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Buono, M.J., Roby, J.J., Micale, F.G., Sallis, J.F., & Shepard, W.E. (1991). Validity and reliability of predicting maximum oxygen uptake viafieldtests in children and adolescents. Pediatric Exercise Science, 3,

23 354 Short and Winnick Colgan, S.M. (1978). A comparative study of the American Alliance of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation Youth Fitness Test and a proposedfitness test. Unpublished master's thesis. University of Missouri, Columbia. Consensus Development Conference. (1995). Physical activity and cardiovascular health. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health. Cooper Instimte for Aerobics Research. (1992). The Prudential FITNESSGRAM Test administration manual. Dallas, TX: Author. Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research. (1999). The FITNESSGRAM Test administration manual. Dallas, TX: Author. Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research. (2004). FITNESSGRAM/ACTIVITYGRAM Test administration manual. Dallas, TX: Author. Cumming, G.R., Goulding, D., & Baggley, G. (1971). Working capacity of deaf and visually and mentally handicapped children. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 46, Cureton, K.J. (1994). Aerobic capacity. In J.R. Morrow, H.B. Falls, & H.W. Kohl, (Eds.), The Prudential FITNESSGRAM technical reference manual (pp ). Dallas, TX: The Cooper Institute of Aerobics Research. Cureton, K.J., & Warren, G.L. (1990). Criterion referenced standards for youth health related fitness tests: A tutorial. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 61, Doolittle, T.L., & Bigbee, R. (1968). The twelve-minute run-walk: A test of cardiorespiratory fitness of adolescent boys. Research Quarterly, 39, Doolittle, T.L., Dominic, J.C., & Doolittle, J. (1969). The reliability of selected cardiorespiratory endurance field tests with adolescent female population. American Corrective Therapy Journal, 23, Erikssen, J. (1986). Physical fitness and coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality: A prospective study in apparently healthy, middle-aged men. Acta Medica Scandinavica Supplementum, 711, Femhall, B., Millar, A., Pitteti, K., Hensen, T, Vukovich, M. (2000). Cross validation of the 20-m shuttle run test for children and adolescents with mental retardation. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 17, Femhall, B., Pitetti, K., Vukovich, M., Stubbs, N., Hensen, T, Winnick, J., & Short, F. (1998). Validation of cardiovascular fitness field tests in children with mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 102, Femhall, B., Tymeson, G.T., & Webster, G.E. (1988). Cardiovascular fitness in mentally retarded individuals. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 5, Hopkins, W.G., Gaeta, H., Thomas, A.C., & Hill, PM. (1987). Physical fitness for blind and sighted children. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 56, Lee, M., Ward, G. & Shephard, R.J. (1985). Physical capacities of sightless adolescents. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 27, ^. Leger, L.A., Mercier, D., Gadoury, C, & Lambert, J. (1988). The multistage 20 meter shuttle run test for aerobic fitness. Journal of Sport Sciences, 6, McArdle, W.D., Katch, F.I., & Katch, V.L. (2001). Exercise physiology. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins McClain, J.J., (2004). Comparison of two versions of the PACER Aerobic Fitness Test. Unpublished master's thesis, Iowa State University. Pate, R.R., PraU, M., Blair, S.N., Haskell, W.L., Macera, C.A., Bouchard, C, Buchner, D., Ettinger, W., Heath, G.W., King, A.C., Kriska, A., Leon, A.S., Marcus, B.H., Morris, J., Paffenbarger, R.S., Patrick, K., Pollack, M.L., Rippe, J.M., Sallis, J., & Willmore, J.H. (1995). Physical activity and public health. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, Peters, R.K., Cady, L.D., Jr., Bischoff, D.P, Bemsten, L., & Pike, M.C. (1983). Physical fitness and subsequent myocardial infarction of healthy workers. Journal of the American Medical Association, 249,

24 Aerobic Functioning 355 Pitetti, K.H., Femhall, B., & Figoni, S. (2002). Comparing two regression formulas that predict VO^^^^ using the 20-m shuttle mn for children and adolescents. Pediatric Exercise Science, 14, Rikli, R.E., Petray, C, & Baumgartner, T.A. (1992). The reliability of distance mn tests for children in grades K-4. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63, Rimmer, J.H., Connor-Kuntz, F, Winnick, J.R, & Short, F.X. (1997). Feasibility of the Target Aerobic Movement Test in children and adolescents with spina bifida. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 14, Ross, J.G., Dotson, CO., Gilbert, G.G., & Katz, S.J. (1985). New standards for fitness measurement. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 56(1), Safrit, M.J., & Wood, T.M. (1995). Introduction to measurement in physical education and exercise science (3rd ed.). St Louis, MO: Mosby-Year Book, Inc. Shephard, R.J. (1990). Fitness in special populations. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Sobolski, J., Komitzer, M., De Backer, G., Dramaix, M., Abramowicz, M., Degre, S., & Denolin, D. (1987). Protection against ischemic heart disease in the Belgian physical fitness study: Physical fitness rather than physical activity? American Journal of Epidemiology, 125, Sundberg, S. (1982). Maximum oxygen uptake in relation to age in blind and normal boys and girls. Acta Paediatrica Scandinavica, 71, Tell, G.S., & Vellar, O.D. (1988). Physicalfitness,physical activity, and cardiovascular disease risk factors in adolescents: The Oslo youth study. Preventive Medicine, 17, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1996). Physical activity and health: A report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center of Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Vodola, T.M. (1978). Developmental and adapted physical education (A.C.T.l.V.E.) motor ability and physical fitness norms: For normal, mentally retarded, learning disabled, and emotionally disturbed individuals. Oakhurst, NJ: Township of Ocean School District. Wilhelmsen, L., Bjure, J., Ekstrom-Jodal, B., Aurell, M., Brimby, G., Svardsudd, K,. Tibblen, G,. & Wedel, H. (1981). Nine years' follow-up of a maximal exercise test in a random population sample of middle-aged men. Cardiology, 68(Suppl. 2),l-8. Williams, C, Armstrong, N., Eves, N., & Falkner, A. (1996). Peak aerobic fitness of visually impaired and sighted adolescent girls. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 90, Winnick, J.P & Short, FX. (1985). Physical fitness testing of the disabled: Project UNIQUE. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Winnick, J.R, & Short, F.X. (1999). The Brockport Physical Fitness Test. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Winnick, J. P. & Short, F.X. (1998). Project target: Criterion-referenced physical fitness standards for adolescents with disabilities final report. (Project No. H023C ). Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education. Brockport, NY: State University of New York, Brockport. (ERIC ED433627). World Health Organization. (2004). Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. World Health Assembly resolution WHA 57.17, endorsed May 22, 2004.

25